Jump to content
Server time: 2017-08-19, 03:50

Sign in to follow this  
lunathecat

Should Settlement Rule 14.4 be Removed?

Settlement rule 14.4   

99 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the settlement rule 14.4 be removed?

    • Yes
      51
    • No
      48


Recommended Posts

lunathecat    26
  • 14.4 Settlements may only be attacked by other factions and only once a day per faction. The settlement may also be attacked once at any time by those who have been attacked by the settlement hosts outside of the settlement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dusty    1039

Honestly, fuck all the settlement rules. So, yes, it should be removed.

I'm of the mind that if your group of 20 people cannot hold your claim of territory, then it's very clear that you should not own that territory, or go around claiming territories you can't hold. We shouldn't be giving groups that should be able to protect themselves and their claims special rights and protections through OOC rules.

Edited by Dusty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
William    398

No, I think it's fine. It prevents smaller groups from taking advantage of like 3 people in a settlement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

Never liked OOC rules protecting people IC. Its IG so deal with it IG. Fucka settlement rule, take them away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Reav    127

But what will protect the campfire RPers? :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

I hate all the settlement rules tbh. These settlements just use hardcore rule armor to get what they want in game. You want a settlement? Protect it yourselves. Don't want to get attacked by bandits? Compromise and make a deal with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Castiel    1124

I'll paste something I wrote up from when we discussed removing the rule internally. Just my two cents.

In no way do I support the "rule armour" aspect of things, and I don't believe these rules encourage rule armour at all. As I've explained in multiple threads, Slack and TeamSpeak discussions regarding these rules, I think they are fine.

To create and sustain a settlement you need manpower. You come across a settlement ICly (be it via the Map, or stumbling across it in-game), these are hot spots. Not safe zones by any means, but popular areas in which survivors come to do trade, meet others or seek protection. If I come across a settlement I would assume they have manpower, regardless of if there is only 4/5 people online at the time - it takes a lot of people to sustain a settlement/community like this in the apocalypse (think Alexandria, The Hilltop etc from The Walking Dead). Just because everyone is not online does not mean the settlement isn't well protected ICly.

It would make absolutely no IC sense for me and a small group of bandits to attack a self-sustaining settlement which must be run by a large group (otherwise ICly there would be no settlement, they would've been wiped out already). So attacking a settlement with a small group would be a suicide mission. It doesn't matter if you're a small squad of dank PvPers because ICly that means squat when you're out-manned and outgunned. It's not about skill in a video game, it's about "will me and my small band of merry men survive attacking this much larger group?" and 9/10 times, in real life, you would not.

The only other argument I can think of is "Well what if I gather a large group to attack them so we realistically stand a chance?" and my counter to that would be, if you have the manpower to attack a settlement and win - why not just create a faction? In my opinion these rules only encourage survivors to gather numbers and join groups. If you want to survive in the apocalypse, especially as a bandit, you need to have allies. If you want to attack / destroy / pillage a settlement, you should gather a large force to do so, thus ensuring not only your survival but your victory in this endeavour.

As for the KoS rights against disruptive people within the camp / settlement, I think it makes perfect sense also. Why would you as a lone individual go into a large settlement and think you can get away with waving your dick around, stealing etc? It's stupid. To walk into a large settlement and make demands, insult members and/or begin stealing their supplies - you should expect a bullet. You're in their house and you're taking a shit all over their doorstep, expect consequences. It's not "permanent KoS rights" by any means, it's the right to kill disruptive people within your own home. Not the right to kill people who don't follow your "rules" placed on the settlement thread, because any faction could create ridiculous rules i.e "No shoes allowed within the settlement. Anyone seen wearing shoes will be shot on sight." - it is the right to kill aggressive or disruptive characters. Nothing else.

  • If you want to attack them and have a lot of friends - join or create a faction.
  • If you want to attack them but only have a small group - wait for members of the faction to leave the settlement and attack them whilst they're vulnerable.
  • If you only want to go into a settlement and wave your big e-peen around, demanding this that and the other whilst taking what you want and doing as you please - don't be surprised when you get a 5.56 sandwich for lunch.

In conclusion, whilst yes I do think the host faction should be able to protect themselves ICly and think smart - I also think the aggressor party should think to themselves "Would I survive this?" before going in guns blazing on a campfire group just because you know OOCly that they don't stand a chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mexi    1024

I'm tired of being big dicked by any form of settlement protectors just because they know I can't do anything due to rules. +1 to removal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Species    237

In a sense it works, this stops people from coming in as 1 person and big dicking. Emptying barrels, screaming in people's faces, and generally being a fuck wit. So when the CRs come and tell them to fuck or they die the trouble makers friends just shoot everyone. That is using rule armor too.

Now it also causes issues where the CRs just walk around like Jesus with Holy Rule armor big dicking everyone in their camp's radius. It's a problem either way you go, so which one can you deal with more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DocTeeth    33

I have to agree with the removal of these rules mainly because I personally would like to see role play be the #1 cause to stop people from attacking.. IE: Bandits hit GM, bounty get put out on said bandits, bandits get caught/killed {Of course as long as all pvp rules are followed} And if the bounty is marked for death then its a lifetime bounty until permma'd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

Remove guns from the game. Damn PVPers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shadows    1000

I actually like this rule.

If a settlement is completely friendly and doesn't hurt you then it doesn't make since IC'ly to go attack them. This rule allows for you to still attack if you're in a faction, which there are plenty of that can still attack it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

I can see the benefit in the rules given that no one in this server dies. People will just relentlessly attack day after day the same settlement no matter how many times, and no matter how many losses. It's a bit silly after awhile to see how many times Camp 101 was raided. People just overkill raiding places to the point where they do it simply because they're bored, and have no real IC reasoning. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweetJoe    280

Seems like half the gms responded using the word "hate" or similar.  Up on you for being honest and vocal here. Perhaps it is time we re-examine these rules since the enforcers seem to think its a terrible rule.

Edited by Winslow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

Seems most GMs dislike settlement rules yet jimmy was banned and appeal denied for it.   Interesting.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MagicMike    69

So settlement rules are a new thing so obviously ppl are gonna hate em. 

I just dont get how people say "if u want a settlement protect it urself !!1!!1!!!1 settlement rules dumb af tbh"

Settlements are cool, they make for a solid and fairly realistic roleplay spot. Oh and by the way a majority of people here dont play on the server 24/7.  So when everyone is sleeping soundly a guy from sweden is gonn log in and take it all, one guy, take it all. Does that make sense? No. Albeit some of these rules are stupid, like the one here. Also i think its a tad silly that people can just kill robbers, wtf, no. if there is a strong presence of peeps and someone sneaks up and takes an apple why kill him.

Ah yes, now you might say "well people wouldn't realistic for stealing an apple but they probably will since the rules say they can"

 

I think settlements are super controversial. id MUCH rather a staff run settlement that had these rules, so that the usual big groups who rob lil kids all the time are now also protected with settlement rules. 

 

Let things take their course, GM trading post was cool, however a bunch of randos stole everything overnight, i saw them literally taking tents and runnin off, prettttttty silly, but hey, dicks will be dick right. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Species    237
23 minutes ago, Winslow said:

Seems like half the gms responded using the word "hate" or similar.  Up on you for being honest and vocal here. Perhaps it is time we re-examine these rules since the enforcers seem to think its a terrible rule.

2/9 isn't half, but if we had the rest of the @GM s respond to this then maybe something could be worked out. However, nothing will come of this unless we have staff hoesntly post their opinions like Castiel and Mental have.

In all honestly being someone who hangs around Settlements and is in a group setting one up we even see the flaws in the current rules. I think we should go back to "If you set up a camp you take the risk."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
reesesaddict    28

I see the points of a lot of people here, but I need to agree to have some of the rules taken away, particularly the rule on not allowing attacks on factions unless you are a faction. There are MANY situations where a group may need to attack a group larger than them. Perhaps the settlement murdered a member of your group, and you want to seek out revenge. If that group decides to just hang around their settlement, they are untouchable.

To many people, home is the most important place to a person, OOCly and ICly. If someone were to destroy your home, make you feel unsafe in your own home, that would be terrifying. It would make people think twice about certain actions that might fall back on them negatively. With this rule, you eliminate lots of great fear RP and perhaps actual fear, because Dayz will cause fear, whether you want it or not. 

I'd recommend we discuss the rules amongst the community and make the rules ourselves, whether on Google Docs or in TS, but listening to the community is extremely important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

There doesn't need to be rules.  People need to stop being stubborn sore losing bastards.   If you are getting wiped by a powerful bandit group on the daily, instead of crying for the admins to make new rules to protect you how about handling in character.  Admit defeat and give into demands.  It's simple.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
   819

these rules are horrific please remove actually remove all the pillow rules its a zombie apocalypse at the end of the day. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shane    353

Main reasons for the settlement rules (I believe), is the groups that get attacked and raided everyday 5 times a day were starting to become less active leading to archive and then the bandit group will wait for people to log off and they would go and take down all the tents in a camp and throw all the shit on the floor, which was just making the game not fun for said group and causing people to leave.

Edited by Shane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweetJoe    280
15 minutes ago, Species said:

2/9 isn't half, but if we had the rest of the @GM s respond to this then maybe something could be worked out. However, nothing will come of this unless we have staff hoesntly post their opinions like Castiel and Mental have.

In all honestly being someone who hangs around Settlements and is in a group setting one up we even see the flaws in the current rules. I think we should go back to "If you set up a camp you take the risk."

well dusty is on break right? does that not make 3? isn't that like...a third... as I said, It seems to be half, as I anticipate since the first 3 to respond were against the rule, odds are others are as well. seems like nearly half to me. <3

Edited by Winslow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
23 minutes ago, tinyshmeck said:

So settlement rules are a new thing so obviously ppl are gonna hate em. 

There not new we had em back in 2013 when we had the DayZ mod they didnt work then and they dont work now. Putting OOC restrictions on people in this way is BS as it can disrupt the natural flow of roleplay in major ways.

+1 this rule needs to be removed as Dusty said if you have enough people for a faction you have enough people to defend a settlement without OOC rules to help you even more.

This coming from a faction owner who has a settlement.

3 minutes ago, Shane said:

wait for people to log off and they would go and take down all the tents in a camp and throw all the shit on the floor, which was just making the game not fun for said group and causing people to leave.

Theres nothing stopping people from still doing that.

Edited by Valkerion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shane    353
1 minute ago, Valkerion said:

 

Theres nothing stopping people from still doing that.

True but it don't seem to be happening as much anymore from what I have seen.

Edited by Shane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×